Runway28L wrote:

Anyone know how many 145s TransStates has and if they're still receiving any?

I’m showing TransStates operating 15 of AA’s E145s and three of their own for American Eagle currently. I also understand, but can’t remember the source, that the 15 AA-owned E145s will return to MQ or PDT at the end of the contract in 2019, like the ExpressJet E145s did.

kitplane01 wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

I'm curious what they will do with flights such as Chicago to Marquette, Mi. It's a CRJ-700. If you move that plane type to PSA, which has no crew based in Chicago, how do you operate the flight?

Also, what did Envoy air do wrong? If you take planes from them, and don't give them planes ....

Airlines do not schedule pilots to only fly flights into and out of their crew domicile. Typically, Your crew base is just were you start and stop your trips. Your trip will take you throughout the entire system. For example, I was recently in Boise for an overnight from a flight that originated in IAH, yet I'm not based in IAH nor does my airline even have a crew domicile there. I then flew to Chicago on a Skywest flight which was operated by a LAX Based crew.

I knew that.

But if the plan is for PSA to fly lots of flights out of Chicago, and yet have no base in Chicago, that seems inefficient. Especially when a different wholly owned subsidiary already has a crew base in Chicago. I'm sure someone did math to make sure it works, but it's a surprising outcome.

I'm not sure that PSA growth at ORD is in the cards. They fly a handful of routes, namely DSM, MSP, BDL, DAY, and a couple others. But they probably won't get much bigger than that at ORD. With the lightning fast ramp up of CRJ-700 ops plus the migration of E175s moving in from Envoy, it is doubtful that PSA will play a role at ORD. They have enough flying to cover out east, with the drawdown of Piedmont's Dash 8 ops and the end of the Air Whisky contract.

MLIAA wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

Airlines do not schedule pilots to only fly flights into and out of their crew domicile. Typically, Your crew base is just were you start and stop your trips. Your trip will take you throughout the entire system. For example, I was recently in Boise for an overnight from a flight that originated in IAH, yet I'm not based in IAH nor does my airline even have a crew domicile there. I then flew to Chicago on a Skywest flight which was operated by a LAX Based crew.

I knew that.

But if the plan is for PSA to fly lots of flights out of Chicago, and yet have no base in Chicago, that seems inefficient. Especially when a different wholly owned subsidiary already has a crew base in Chicago. I'm sure someone did math to make sure it works, but it's a surprising outcome.

I'm not sure that PSA growth at ORD is in the cards. They fly a handful of routes, namely DSM, MSP, BDL, DAY, and a couple others. But they probably won't get much bigger than that at ORD. With the lightning fast ramp up of CRJ-700 ops plus the migration of E175s moving in from Envoy, it is doubtful that PSA will play a role at ORD. They have enough flying to cover out east, with the drawdown of Piedmont's Dash 8 ops and the end of the Air Whisky contract.

Piedmont is taking 2 ERJ-145's per month and they already have about 35 planes in the fleet along with 11 Dash-8-300's. The plan is in the end to have 60-70 ERJ-145's total. I don't hear any word if Piedmont will get any ERJ-140's.

jgcotter wrote:

Boeing778X wrote:

I'm getting mixed numbers with the number of E145s at MQ. What's the exact amount?

With the ExpressJet E145s back on property at MQ and the transfer of one today to Piedmont, I’m showing 69 E145s currently at MQ.

Correction; 68, sorry ‘bout that!

jgcotter wrote:

jgcotter wrote:

Boeing778X wrote:

I'm getting mixed numbers with the number of E145s at MQ. What's the exact amount?

With the ExpressJet E145s back on property at MQ and the transfer of one today to Piedmont, I’m showing 69 E145s currently at MQ.

Correction; 68, sorry ‘bout that!

That's okay. The number is changing a lot though.

Wow! Even the E145 fleet at MQ is beginning to get down there! In a few months, there may be the a similar number of E140s and E145s.

dh8 n805ex and n806ex have been sent to avmax at gtf. 4 remain at piedmont.

aaflyer222 wrote:

dh8 n805ex and n806ex have been sent to avmax at gtf. 4 remain at piedmont.

N941 was handed over to Avmax on December 15, the same day as N805, N806 and N975. This leaves three (N809, N837, N839) which are still active.

kitplane01 wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

I'm curious what they will do with flights such as Chicago to Marquette, Mi. It's a CRJ-700. If you move that plane type to PSA, which has no crew based in Chicago, how do you operate the flight?

Also, what did Envoy air do wrong? If you take planes from them, and don't give them planes ....

Airlines do not schedule pilots to only fly flights into and out of their crew domicile. Typically, Your crew base is just were you start and stop your trips. Your trip will take you throughout the entire system. For example, I was recently in Boise for an overnight from a flight that originated in IAH, yet I'm not based in IAH nor does my airline even have a crew domicile there. I then flew to Chicago on a Skywest flight which was operated by a LAX Based crew.

I knew that.

But if the plan is for PSA to fly lots of flights out of Chicago, and yet have no base in Chicago, that seems inefficient. Especially when a different wholly owned subsidiary already has a crew base in Chicago. I'm sure someone did math to make sure it works, but it's a surprising outcome.

During the bankruptcy when the economy was in the toilet AAG asked Envoy for concessions. The pilots didn't want to give them, but they did. AAG then asked for more cuts. During this time Envoy, ExpressJet, Air Wisconsin, and Endeavor were all holding strong and refusing to give more. As a result, AAG took the 175's that Compass flies away from Envoy as a strongarm tactic. The Envoy pilots didn't blink. AAG then on a daily basis threatened more and more punishments for the Envoy group, specifically with the threat of them being the next Comair. At the same time, the MEC at PSA agreed to take the pay cuts in exchange for the CRJ900 order as well as having the Envoy CRJ700's moved over to them. This outraged the Envoy pilots, and they now lost all leverage and were left with no choice but to agree to concessions. PSA proceded to have to balls to then come to Envoy and try to lure the pilots over to PSA along with the 700's. A few chose to do so, and are labeled as pariahs. This is just a bit of a history lesson, but it's a glimpse into why someone who was at PSA during the bankruptcy will never be welcome on my jumpseat.

airtran737 wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

flightsimer wrote:

Airlines do not schedule pilots to only fly flights into and out of their crew domicile. Typically, Your crew base is just were you start and stop your trips. Your trip will take you throughout the entire system. For example, I was recently in Boise for an overnight from a flight that originated in IAH, yet I'm not based in IAH nor does my airline even have a crew domicile there. I then flew to Chicago on a Skywest flight which was operated by a LAX Based crew.

I knew that.

But if the plan is for PSA to fly lots of flights out of Chicago, and yet have no base in Chicago, that seems inefficient. Especially when a different wholly owned subsidiary already has a crew base in Chicago. I'm sure someone did math to make sure it works, but it's a surprising outcome.

During the bankruptcy when the economy was in the toilet AAG asked Envoy for concessions. The pilots didn't want to give them, but they did. AAG then asked for more cuts. During this time Envoy, ExpressJet, Air Wisconsin, and Endeavor were all holding strong and refusing to give more. As a result, AAG took the 175's that Compass flies away from Envoy as a strongarm tactic. The Envoy pilots didn't blink. AAG then on a daily basis threatened more and more punishments for the Envoy group, specifically with the threat of them being the next Comair. At the same time, the MEC at PSA agreed to take the pay cuts in exchange for the CRJ900 order as well as having the Envoy CRJ700's moved over to them. This outraged the Envoy pilots, and they now lost all leverage and were left with no choice but to agree to concessions. PSA proceded to have to balls to then come to Envoy and try to lure the pilots over to PSA along with the 700's. A few chose to do so, and are labeled as pariahs. This is just a bit of a history lesson, but it's a glimpse into why someone who was at PSA during the bankruptcy will never be welcome on my jumpseat.

Ahhh, I think I understand.

When you said "Envoy" I thought you meant the corporation named "Envoy", which is owned by AAG and has to do what they say.

But you really meant "pilots at Envoy", which explains the situation.

What do the rest of the Envoy workers think about all this? Did they get pay cuts, etc. Are they also losing jobs? What's the situation? Just curious ...

MO11 wrote:

aaflyer222 wrote:

dh8 n805ex and n806ex have been sent to avmax at gtf. 4 remain at piedmont.

N941 was handed over to Avmax on December 15, the same day as N805, N806 and N975. This leaves three (N809, N837, N839) which are still active.

DH8-1 N941HA is en route from SBY to GTF via IRS and ABR for Avmax.

E140 N852AE is back in service with Envoy in legacy livery.

E140 N817AE is in service with Envoy in new livery.

jgcotter wrote:

jgcotter wrote:

jgcotter wrote:

Based strictly upon aircraft movement, I now show 14 E140s back in service with Envoy. Of these 14, I show 9 having spent a week at AMA, which is a paint facility, and a week is about right for paint.

Update; 14 in service, 10 painted.

Update; 14 in service, 12 painted.

Update; 15 in service, 12 painted

kitplane01 wrote:

airtran737 wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

I knew that.

But if the plan is for PSA to fly lots of flights out of Chicago, and yet have no base in Chicago, that seems inefficient. Especially when a different wholly owned subsidiary already has a crew base in Chicago. I'm sure someone did math to make sure it works, but it's a surprising outcome.

During the bankruptcy when the economy was in the toilet AAG asked Envoy for concessions. The pilots didn't want to give them, but they did. AAG then asked for more cuts. During this time Envoy, ExpressJet, Air Wisconsin, and Endeavor were all holding strong and refusing to give more. As a result, AAG took the 175's that Compass flies away from Envoy as a strongarm tactic. The Envoy pilots didn't blink. AAG then on a daily basis threatened more and more punishments for the Envoy group, specifically with the threat of them being the next Comair. At the same time, the MEC at PSA agreed to take the pay cuts in exchange for the CRJ900 order as well as having the Envoy CRJ700's moved over to them. This outraged the Envoy pilots, and they now lost all leverage and were left with no choice but to agree to concessions. PSA proceded to have to balls to then come to Envoy and try to lure the pilots over to PSA along with the 700's. A few chose to do so, and are labeled as pariahs. This is just a bit of a history lesson, but it's a glimpse into why someone who was at PSA during the bankruptcy will never be welcome on my jumpseat.

Ahhh, I think I understand.

When you said "Envoy" I thought you meant the corporation named "Envoy", which is owned by AAG and has to do what they say.

But you really meant "pilots at Envoy", which explains the situation.

What do the rest of the Envoy workers think about all this? Did they get pay cuts, etc. Are they also losing jobs? What's the situation? Just curious ...

There were pay cuts all around. Each Union bargained as necessary. Envoy’s flight attendants aren’t well paid and weren’t used in a whipsaw, nor were the fleet service agents.

Doug and Pedro used PSA and their willingness to scab to force a second round of concessions out of the Envoy pilots. If the pilots didn’t give into their demands, then they would have shut the company down just like Delta did to Comair. Nobody has forgotten what management did as well as PSA. You’ll never see a PSA pilot from that time period on my jumpseat.

Envoy is bringing back 58 aircraft. What goes into reactivation?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do they have pilots to fly those aircraft?

AA must see growth opportunity with the strong economy and this is a quick way to add to their fleet. That’s a lot of jets to add back, granted small RJs, but I’m curious where they’ll send them.

How many of them will be in the old American Eagle livery?

cpr05 wrote:

Envoy is bringing back 58 aircraft. What goes into reactivation?

When was it announced that all the E140s would be coming back into service? The airline took delivery of 59 140s.

dbo861 wrote:

Do they have pilots to fly those aircraft?

AA must see growth opportunity with the strong economy and this is a quick way to add to their fleet. That’s a lot of jets to add back, granted small RJs, but I’m curious where they’ll send them.

It's not really growth. PDT recently retired the last DH8 and AA loses the AWI flying in Feb.

I guess they are not too expensive to fly? Larger regional jets are of course more economical to fly.

dbo861 wrote:

Do they have pilots to fly those aircraft?

AA must see growth opportunity with the strong economy and this is a quick way to add to their fleet. That’s a lot of jets to add back, granted small RJs, but I’m curious where they’ll send them.

They will probably use them to serve smaller cities / smaller markets. Pasco / Tri - Cities airport in Washington State still wants non - stop service to Los Angeles. These smaller regional jets would be great in smaller markets.

All to be reactivated by 2Q 2018. Most are stored at Mathis Field in "Near-Flying" condition on month to month lease of ramp space.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envoy_Air

dc10lover wrote:

All to be reactivated by 2Q 2018. Most are stored at Mathis Field in "Near-Flying" condition on month to month lease of ramp space.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envoy_Air

Wikipedia is hardly reliable?

dc10lover wrote:

All to be reactivated by 2Q 2018. Most are stored at Mathis Field in "Near-Flying" condition on month to month lease of ramp space.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envoy_Air

Where exactly on the field? I was just checking on Google Earth and not only are there precisely zero E-jets there, but the largest aircraft is pretty much a solo A-10.

Spacepope wrote:

Where exactly on the field? I was just checking on Google Earth and not only are there precisely zero E-jets there, but the largest aircraft is pretty much a solo A-10.

Here is an image from November. I still would like to see a source beside wikipedia though.

Wow, I didn't realize they were bringing so many back! There are already a handful back in operation, some in the new colors and some in the old.

cpr05 wrote:

Envoy is bringing back 58 aircraft. What goes into reactivation?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They are ferried from SJT to ABI and undergo a check. If it’s time for a heavy check, then they get new interiors, updated FMS’ and a paint job. If it’s not time for a heavy check, then they are returned to service in the old colors and will fly like that until they are due to go back for a heavy. We are now also using a MRO in Quebec to help with the re-activation.

bmibaby737 wrote:

dc10lover wrote:

All to be reactivated by 2Q 2018. Most are stored at Mathis Field in "Near-Flying" condition on month to month lease of ramp space.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envoy_Air

Wikipedia is hardly reliable?

It can be reliable if you check the citations included therein that are typically reliable:

http://sanangelolive.com/news/business/ ... this-field

Jshank83 wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

Where exactly on the field? I was just checking on Google Earth and not only are there precisely zero E-jets there, but the largest aircraft is pretty much a solo A-10.

Here is an image from November. I still would like to see a source beside wikipedia though.

Excellent! Thank you.

Glad to see the planes gping back to usefulness.
Stopped by SJT last April and saw the numerous planes there (and all the SF340s at Abilene) looking a bit dogged lol.

AAtakeMeAway wrote:

bmibaby737 wrote:

dc10lover wrote:

All to be reactivated by 2Q 2018. Most are stored at Mathis Field in "Near-Flying" condition on month to month lease of ramp space.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envoy_Air

Wikipedia is hardly reliable?

It can be reliable if you check the citations included therein that are typically reliable:

http://sanangelolive.com/news/business/ ... this-field

Nothing in this says they are being reactivated though. It only talks about them being stored.

Jshank83 wrote:

AAtakeMeAway wrote:

bmibaby737 wrote:

Wikipedia is hardly reliable?

It can be reliable if you check the citations included therein that are typically reliable:

http://sanangelolive.com/news/business/ ... this-field

Nothing in this says they are being reactivated though. It only talks about them being stored.

Date of article, "By Joe Hyde | Apr. 9, 2015 8:30 am". Almost three years ago, a lot has happened since then.

cheapgreek wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

AAtakeMeAway wrote:

It can be reliable if you check the citations included therein that are typically reliable:

http://sanangelolive.com/news/business/ ... this-field

Nothing in this says they are being reactivated though. It only talks about them being stored.

Date of article, "By Joe Hyde | Apr. 9, 2015 8:30 am". Almost three years ago, a lot has happened since then.

The point is, one can't cite wikipedia as a reference, claim that the citations within Wiki are accurate, and use that as justification since the citation itself doesn't corroborate the claim. There is no citation on the Wikipedia article that says the planes are being reactivated.

Wasn't AA Eagle on of the very few airlines that actually ordered the E-140's? I flew on them regularly out of ICT when I was commuting between the PNW and Kansas.

usairways85 wrote:

dbo861 wrote:

Do they have pilots to fly those aircraft?

AA must see growth opportunity with the strong economy and this is a quick way to add to their fleet. That’s a lot of jets to add back, granted small RJs, but I’m curious where they’ll send them.

It's not really growth. PDT recently retired the last DH8 and AA loses the AWI flying in Feb.

The 11 Dash-8-300's will be flying till June 2018.

wedgetail737 wrote:

Wasn't AA Eagle on of the very few airlines that actually ordered the E-140's? I flew on them regularly out of ICT when I was commuting between the PNW and Kansas.

I thought they went to AX (Trans States originally)

Given the Air Wisconsin exit, there is really no way they can maintain their network unless they add some small RJs next month. This is a plausible story on that basis.

I'm guessing these will be PDT crews and operate former AWI CRJ and PDT Dash 8 routes out of PHL?

drdisque wrote:

I'm guessing these will be PDT crews and operate former AWI CRJ and PDT Dash 8 routes out of PHL?

PDT is taking a lot of the PHL flying, but PSA and arepublic are in there as well. Envoy will soon be operating into PHL via JFK 6 times a day.

Wow,
I thought those were stored in Kingman AZ. Learn something new each day.

ODwyerPW wrote:

Wow,
I thought those were stored in Kingman AZ. Learn something new each day.

Those are the E135s

So at this point this is still a rumor.

I just removed it from the article, there is no sourcing to support this.

RJNUT wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

Wasn't AA Eagle on of the very few airlines that actually ordered the E-140's? I flew on them regularly out of ICT when I was commuting between the PNW and Kansas.

I thought they went to AX (Trans States originally)

IIRC you’re thinking of the ones that were flown by CHQ as American Connection back in the 00’s. If memory serves correctly those were owned by AA. Trans States did fly some 145’s that were owned by AA and originally with Eagle but those went back to Eagle (well Envoy now), I suppose it’ll always be Eagle to me but that’s old school lol. Anyway those frames flown as American Connection were originally from the STL days then went up to ORD once STL was pulled down.. hope I got all of this straight, it’s all on memory so please be easy lol.

On a side note, does anyone recall where those 140’s went that originally flew under Connection?

CR7 N501BG just arrived from SAW to DAY for transfer from Envoy to PSA. 35 CR7s on property now at PSA.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N501BG

E145 N639AE just arrived from SAW to SBY for transfer from Envoy to Piedmont. 36 E145s on property now at Piedmont.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N639AE

jgcotter wrote:

jgcotter wrote:

jgcotter wrote:

Based strictly upon aircraft movement, I now show 14 E140s back in service with Envoy. Of these 14, I show 9 having spent a week at AMA, which is a paint facility, and a week is about right for paint.

Update; 14 in service, 10 painted.

Update; 14 in service, 12 painted.

Update; 16 in service, 12 painted.

Based strictly upon aircraft movement, I now show 16 E140s back in service with Envoy. Of these 16, I show 12 having spent a week at AMA, which is a paint facility, and a week is about right for paint.

jgcotter wrote:

Based strictly upon aircraft movement, I now show 16 E140s back in service with Envoy. Of these 16, I show 12 having spent a week at AMA, which is a paint facility, and a week is about right for paint.

Darn I liked the old livery. Guess this means they'll be in service for a while.

cvgComair wrote:

I just removed it from the article, there is no sourcing to support this.

This are some references to reactivating these aircraft in this thread:

https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/2493893-post6435.html

https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/2493923-post6441.html